The Cassidy Law Firm Blog

Re: Decision of the en banc Court of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit:

Planned Parenthood v. Rounds, Alpha Center, et al

Docket Nos.: 09-3231/3233/3362

What: US Court of Appeals en banc Court declares that South Dakota’s statute that requires abortion doctors to disclose to pregnant mothers that an abortion places the mother at increased risk for suicide ideation and suicide constitutional because the disclosure is truthful, non-misleading, and relevant to the pregnant mother’s decision of whether or not to consent to an abortion.

(See website later today for Mr. Cassidy’s personal analysis on the decision)

I. Today’s decision of the en banc Court of the United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit) is a fabulous victory for the women of the State of South Dakota. The Court ruled that the women will now be given additional important information before they consent to an abortion: that the abortion places a woman at increased risk of suicide ideation and suicide.

This victory represents the fourth separate decision of the Eighth Circuit reversing the District Court in this one case, two decisions issued by en banc Courts four years apart – a rare occurrence that underscores the importance of the issues presented by the case.

As a result of this case upholding all eight major provisions of South Dakota’s Abortion Informed Consent Statute, pregnant mothers will now be informed:

(1) that “an abortion terminates the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being;”

(2) that the mother’s “relationship with that second human being enjoys protection under the Constitution of the United States and the Laws of South Dakota;”

(3) that relationship and all rights attached to it will be terminated; and

Any decision that a pregnant mother makes in the context of her considering an abortion that will deprive her of the joy and fulfillment of a lifelong relationship with her child, must be totally voluntary and well informed. The victory today is a step towards achieving that goal for the women of South Dakota.

II. Normally, we would end our public comments with the statement above. However, we feel that, in this instance, given the fact that South Dakota’s Informed Consent Statute, passed to protect the interests of pregnant mothers in South Dakota, was the subject of false claims and protracted litigation that took seven years to conclude, and required the Intervenors to win four different appeals in the Eighth Circuit, requires further comment.

Throughout the legislative processes, over the past eight years, and all during the pending of this litigation, as well as that of the new case now pending in the District Court (in which Alpha Center and Care Net are party Intervenors), Planned Parenthood has threatened expensive litigation and counsel fees. Planned Parenthood has argued that they should be free to perform their radical abortion practices the way its New York City office prefers and that the people of the State of South Dakota should not impose regulations that reflect the values of the people of the State; and the people should not protect the interests of their pregnant mothers.

Planned Parenthood has been proven completely wrong on every issue in the case. The State Statute is a constitutionally valid method to protect pregnant mothers. Harold Cassidy stated:

“The people of the State of South Dakota have stood up to the threats, false accusations and litigation tactics of Planned Parenthood. In the process, the people of South Dakota have shown that they will not be intimidated by threats of litigation, threats of payment of attorneys’ fees, and will hold fast to their conviction that a handful of people in New York, with a radical philosophy, will not dictate to the people of South Dakota, when, if, and how they will protect their women from harm, pressure, coercion and false and incomplete information when making the most important decision of their lives.”

For further information call Harold J. Cassidy at 732-747-3999 or visit our website